No application for SPC before the date on which the plant protection product has obtained the MA

Print this page 17-12-2013

PATENT LAW

 

Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation No 1610/96 must be interpreted as precluding the issue of a supplementary protection certificate for a plant protection product in respect of which an emergency MA has been issued under Article 8(4) of Directive 91/414.

 

General reasoning ground CJEU with regard to each group of goods which it had established within that class

Print this page 17-12-2013

TRADE MARK LAW

 

General reasoning ground for refusal mark insufficient in respect of non-homogeneous groups of goods or services within the same class.

Evidence submitted by OHIM after expiry of period entails the rejection of the opposition

Print this page 03-12-2013

TRADE MARK LAW - LITIGATION

 

Evidence submitted to OHIM after expiry of period specified; OHIM’s discretion.

 

Jurisdiction for court where damage as a result of copyright infringement has taken place

Print this page 03-12-2013

COPYRIGHTPRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

 

Court of the location where the damage as a result of copyright infringement has taken place only has jurisdiction to determine the damage caused in the state which it is situated

 

Public body "trader" within the meaning of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive

Print this page 03-12-2013

UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICES

 

Terms of a provision of EU law which makes no express reference to the law of the Member States must be given an autonomous and uniform interpretation throughout the European Union, taking into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the legislation in question.

 

General Court may not judge evidence which have not been examined by the Board of Appeal

Print this page 27-11-2013

TRADE MARK LAW LITIGATION

 

General Court may not judge evidence which have not been examined by the Board of Appeal.

 

"50. In those circumstances, Centrotherm Systemtechnik could not ask the General Court to examine, for the purpose of possibly altering the contested decision, the probative value of evidence which had not been examined by the Board of Appeal in that decision."

 

Exclusive right trade mark holder upon lapse of consent to shared use with third party

Print this page 19-11-2013

TRADE MARK LAW

 

National court may not limit exclusive right in a manner which exceeds limitations arising from Articles 5 to 7.

 

No need for professional diligence check in cases of misleading practice

Print this page 19-11-2013

UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICES

 

If a practice can be categorized as a misleading practice, it is not necessary to determine whether this practice is also contrary to the requirements of professional diligence.

 

Older use of color relevant for the assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage

Print this page 18-09-2013

TRADE MARK LAW

 

Genuine use of registered trade mark used only in conjunction with a word mark which is superimposed over it is possible, to the extent that the differences between used and registered do not change the distinctive character.

Shorter hourly television advertising limits for pay-TV broadcasters permitted

Print this page 18-09-2013

MEDIA LAW

 

Shorter hourly television advertising limits for pay-TV broadcasters permitted with due consideration of principle of proportionality.

 

Pages